If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Essential support for under 25s
Essential support for under 25s
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
I would think MP's are not a true representation of society not because of gender but because it (to me) seems far more about connections than gender. Because of history men are more likely to have those sort of connections than women.
My point is why are boys and girls not performing almost equally? There shouldn't really be any difference yet there is for whatever reason. Regardless of which way the difference is I don't believe there should be one.
I am not convinced that a discrepancy in wages in any way correlates to any difference in opportunities. I don't see how you can base job satisfaction on wages. A lot of people are very happy in lower paid jobs that they enjoy doing.
Would you argue I wonder then that men are discriminated against in the nursing profession? I would guess it's not a 50/50 split in that job.
If you say someone is better you are always saying somebody is worse. I don't think it is a good idea to be trying to make generalisations in a school based on gender either way and broadcasting it to students. I think it would be much better in a school to make no distinction on gender so as not to encourage any stereotyping of any sort in young children, surely you agree with this?
Yeah i agree, but if a bloke had a girlfriend who he loved and he knew that her boob size was causing her misery then he would do anything he could to get her what she wanted............surely ?
and if a girl/woman is that depressed/embarrased about the size of her boobs a therapist is gonna cure it (im talking about people who have a real paranoia about any part of their body be it boobs, nose, ears etc)
If my hubby won a comp to give me a boob job then id be the happiest person in Britain tbh.
To be honest parliament is quite old fashioned imo But also that I think because being a politician is thought to be a 'masculine' job (i.e. leadership, decision making ect) as you've said that is the reason... Just as being a primary school teacher is thought to be a 'feminine' (i.e. nurturing, child rearing, looking after under instructions of another ect)
Until gender roles are diminished completely, there won't be a significant change.
Maybe it's because teachers only encourage girls. :yeees:
Perhaps role models for young people have changed?
This doesn't make sense really (at least to me)...You are saying that difference in wages doesn't mean that people are discriminated against? But that anyway wages don't matter because of job satisfaction? Material wealth and enjoying your jobare different things and even so, maybe a job a the top isvery enjoyable.
I hear this claim made a lot, but have never experienced it. Can't somebody post a link or source to back it up?
Learn to read then. My views are not contradictory.
Yes, but why don't women have those connections?
The discrimination against women isn't as blatant as nasty men banning women from the shortlists. The whole sytem is against women. Why do you think that might be?
They should have the same opportunities to perform equally. There shouldn't be differences except by ability and application.
But that wasn't your point at all. Your point was that it's a terrible discrimination against boys that girls' succeses are highlighted and praised. I am still waiting for you to justify this viewpoint.
That's delightful, but what's your point? That women aren't as ambitious? That they just don't want to be CEOs, which is why they aren't?
What's your point? That men are more ambitious, and want nothing more than to be a CEO?
If the vast wage discrepancies are not because of restricted opportunities, then what are they because of? Still waiting for an answer.
Yes, but not by women.
Men who want to go into the "caring" profesions are scorned by other men, because "caring" = "female" = "inferior".
And the fluffy bunny rabbits hop along the lush green grass.
How does praising someone's success mean that you are causing other people to fail?
It isn't a generalisation to say girls are performing better than boys- they are. Whether or not that is fair way to group pupils is another matter- and I would agree, I don't think gender is a relevant quality to group under.
And all the surgery does is to create a practical illusion anyway. Your breasts would be the same size as before, they's just have a lot of crap in them.
God you are talking crap tbh. come back when you know what you are talking about.
Ever thought what it like to feel self concious about a certain part of your body.........nah didnt think so.
For some women/girls a boob job would give them a new lease of life. Things like going swimming are out of the question because they would not wanna let anyone see them in a swimming costume.
The only reason you (or anyone) feel bad about this is becasue others have (unjustly) made you to. All surgery will do is make you think it won't happen again, while it's their problem, not yours.
And it surely wouldn't fix the problem; simply give you a way to avoid dealing with it. Same thing as the teenager who goes out of his way to hide from the bully instead of learning to deal with him.
If women don't have those connections its not because they are being discriminated against now it's because they were. That is not the same thing. It's no more different than the black MP's. Working class MP's or any other misrepresentation.
My point was that it's unfair to say that one gender is better than another. I said nothing about men. I have before tried to explain to you what implies actually mean you still seem to struggle to grasp the concept. Trying to exaggerate what I said achieves nothing.
There are millions of reasons why women may on average have a lower wage than men. Trying to suggest that it is opportunities is almost impossible to prove and I would venture a gross generalisation.
Why do you assume only men scorn nursing profession? How in any way can you prove that?
So why can't they get the connections now then?
???
You were moaning about how the success of girls in schooling is praised. Against every barometer girls are more successful- what, exactly, is your point?
Yeah, and you were talking sweaty donkey balls last time too.
Name a few important ones then. Or even just one.
It's an assertion that, among other people, the United Nations seems to believe in. I'm more inclined to believe them, thanks.
Oh, and we are discussing generalisations. That's what sexism- and any other prejudice and discrimination- deals in.
I can't, but in my experience it is only other men who condemn men for taking "girly" jobs. I really don't think its such an issue for women.
Well as normal you act childish and try to insult people when you can't understand something. I'm not going through why your wrong again as I wasn't the only person that last time tried to improve your shoddy grasp of maths but clearly you are so close minded that you are unable to learn anything.
Why can't men that are working class get those connections now? Or black people? It's not women being discriminated against it's those that aren't in the right position. You are singling out one example and trying to say that being female is the sole reason which is incredibly misinformed.
The point is disgustingly simple there is no reason why pupils success should be grouped by gender. Background maybe, Average IQ, Parents occupations are all valid groupings but you have yet to give one reason why gender is.
Here's a reason why women earn less on average is that more women than men become housewives. They get part time jobs and spend time looking after the children. They don't have to, there are families that men stay in the house and the wife works a full time job but the former is far more likely. Part time jobs earn less money than full time ones. Hopefuly this part of maths you can understand. This is a choice people make that directly affects their earnings without being discriminated against because of opportunity.
I must have forgotten how the United Nations which deals with the concept of global issues obviously knows exactly whats going on in one particular country and will be at the forefront of social research in that country. Thanks for reminding me.
My experiance is different and I have never seen any man ridicule a male nurse so how can you be sure men are not discriminated against in this field or is it purely because it doesn't fit in perfectly with your black and white view of the world?
Oh Christ Almighty.
We're not talking about fucking mathematics. We weren't last time, and we're not this time. We're talking about the English common word implies, not any scientific definition of it. :banghead:
No I'm not, you're not reading what I'm writing.
I'm saying it's a significant issue. Not the only issue, and not even the only significant issue. But it is a very significant issue.
Plenty of "working class" men are in Parliament- one is deputy PM ffs. But why no women and black people? Because of systemic racism and sexism.
Fnagh.
I don't think gender is a valid grouping either. It shouldn't matter. But that wasn't your point, and it certainly wasn't placebo's point.
It isn't "discrimination" to point out that one arbritrary grouping is more successful than another when just about every statistical barometer shows that they are. You are yet to convince me why it is.
The discrepancies are not simply down to less working hours, as this is often taken into account.
The UN are at the fore-front of gender research, so don't make yourself look foolish by pretending otherwise.
Learn to read.
My experience is that this is the case. The boys who did cooking at school were mocked, and nothing i have seen in adult life has shown anything different.
Socially men who do "girly" jobs are looked down upon. That is my experience. I can't prove it without doing a poll or something, and, to be quite honest, its not that important anyway.
The whole issue of the lack of men in "caring" jobs is simply missing the point in a huge way. Men have equal opportunities in these jobs, and often greater opportunities- such as in primary teaching- and the same simply isn't true in reverse.
I don't expect perfect 48/52 splits in all professions, but I find it telling that there is a lack of men in "weak" careers- especially caring- and a lack of women in senior careers. The vast difference cannot be attributed to people wanting different things.
Have you read that link for implies? Defintion 1
oh and look just below it gives you the exact logical connective. How conveniant! It appears the English word implies actually has a mathematical meaning! Well I never!
It's discrimination to take an arbitary grouping and assume that every year it will be repeated like a lot of teachers do. It IS discrimination to assume that because one year of children had more intelligent girls than boys that you should now assume it will be exactly the same in the following year and to change the effort you put into teaching different groupings accordingly.
Would it be OK if it was published every year that white people got better results than black people? Would it then be OK for teachers to say to a black person that they will not be able to be as good as a white person?
A lot of high wage jobs are down to them either having very long boring hours or having some sort of inherent danger. Not everybody wants those jobs.
From talking to two of the guys I know studying nursing they find just as much discrimination from girls when they tell anyone not on the course with them that they are training to be a nurse. I suspect that the experiance they have is far more relevant than your experiance with boys who studied cooking years ago.
Yep.
Definiton 2 is the killer.
Whoops.
Yes.
No.
But that's an irrelevance, unless you are arguing that saying that girls do better means that you're telling boys they are failures. Which, of course, isn't the case.
No, quite.
But are you seriously telling me that all men want them, and all women don't?
Personal choice as a full explanation doesn't cut the mustard.
As for the last bit, I was choosing an example. I'm not getting into a pissing contest as to whose experience is more accurate, because it is impossible and irrelevant anyway.
But it's not funny is it.
There's always truth in humour. What you choose to humour says a lot about a person, and about societal ideals.
"Joking" about the objectification of women re-inforces the message.
at my 2ndry school i can assure you that was the subtle message put across
then i joined college and saw science classes only full of guys, and strangely there was no bias where they just said do your best and we'll judge you on that whilst providing support
from a relatively crappy college came a wrath of A-Cs in chemistry and maths a level
I seriously doubt that.
I suspect that, if anything, you were seeing things that weren't there.
Oh, and one of the things women are is objects. I am male, I like to see beautiful women nekkid. Telling me it's wrong is bullshit, just like saying I shouldn't breathe or eat. Is it all women are? No, of course not.
nope it's a rumour much like the girls maturing mentally faster one - physically yes but our brains all develop about the same time i.e. about 18/19 strangely enough
i like beautiful naked women, does that mean i objectify all women? no it just means i find a few women beautiful and sexy
you cant treat everyone the 'same' anyway - theres people you connect with and/or want to connect with (in many ways
you apply the same basic standard to people - ie don't take the complete pish but thats about it
2 is a rewording of 1. The word you mistake implies for is insinuates. They have different meanings which I would advise you look at.
If it's not OK to tell a black person that they will not do as well as a white person why is it ok to tell a boy they will not be as good as a girl?
I'm not saying all women don't, that would be ludicrous there are women in every profession. This means women can get the jobs. What about joinery? That's not a particulary high paid profession but it's heavily male? Does this mean that the men that do these job all didn't want a nice job in an office?
So it is with children, so it is with male/femlae roles within society. There are certain jobs, whether that is nursing or building, that are "seen" a predominently male or female roles. However, in one of those you have as much chance of employment regardless of gender.
With politics there has been a historic under representation of women. Part of that can be attributed to voter preference but in the main it's about selection committees. It is no accident that the number of potential female candidates is lower than the number of men. Again in part that can be attributed to choice, but do you really think that the figure of 6% isactually only a result of these factors or do you think that in part discrimination plays a part?
no, unless you have been there, got the tshirt then you will never know how it feels. If you are happy with your body and wouldnt wanna change anything then you are never gonna know what its like to feel self concious about a particular part of your body.
Im happy now, but its taken me a very long time to accept me for who I am. I am happily married, my hubby is happy with how I look but if I won a comp tomorrow or he won a comp tomorrow to get me a boob job then i'd be in there like a shot. I have learned to live with how I look, but id still change part of me if I had the chance. But for some people they have a real bad time with how they look and are very self concious and it can affect their whole life in a major way.
The majority of boys prefer guns to dolls, and majority of girls prefers dolls to guns...that's evidently the case, even before socialisation strengthens difference, and regardless of to what extent parents "teach" their children about gender roles.
Like I said is it genetic disposition, or it it imprinted...?